W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ietf-w3c@w3.org > September 2012

Re: web+ and registerProtocolHandler

From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 11:54:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJE5ia8GoMh-YZtN+eXaVO0LLBAQewQ61ZAKSR5RteOD3tqCCQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, "michel@suignard.com" <michel@suignard.com>, "tony@att.com" <tony@att.com>, "plh@w3.org" <plh@w3.org>, "adil@diwan.com" <adil@diwan.com>, "ted.ietf@gmail.com" <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, "John O'Conner" <jooconne@adobe.com>, "presnick@qualcomm.com" <presnick@qualcomm.com>, "chris@lookout.net" <chris@lookout.net>, "public-ietf-w3c@w3.org" <public-ietf-w3c@w3.org>
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> On 19/09/2012, at 1:10 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 18, 2012, at 22:39 , Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>>> If I were trying to solve this problem, I'd be allowing people to register handlers for link *relations*, not schemes; has that come up at all? After all, OpenID is already coordinated through relations…
>>
>> Maybe I'm missing something, but this is intended to be system-wide. How do you convey a link relation in email for instance? Or over Twitter?
>
> Understood, but what's the use case?
>
> I'm not saying that registerProtocolHandler isn't necessary; if somebody wants to send a telnet: link in Twitter and have their favourite Web telnet client open, that's cool.
>
> What I am saying is that using the URI scheme to indicate *any* new protocol -- when by "protocol" you mean a coordination of HTTP, like OAuth or OpenID -- isn't what URI schemes are really for, and I have concerns about where this kind of design will take us (when anybody coming up with a new kind of "web service" decides to mint a URI scheme to identify it).
>
> That sort of thing *is* much more natural to express as a link relation; has anyone proposed registerRelationHandler()?
>
> As to expressing *that* sort of thing in a bare (i.e., context-free) link -- is there really a use case? I.e., how useful is it to express a bare OpenID endpoint in a twitter link, vs. a link to a Web page that then provides an entry point to an OpenID interaction?

As I wrote before, the folks who are best able to answer these
questions are not reading this thread.

Adam
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 19:01:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 19 September 2012 19:01:44 GMT